TSA subpoenas bloggers to find source of security doc leak

At least two travel bloggers who published an internal TSA security directive …

The Transportation Security Administration is attempting to find the source of a leak of a sensitive security directive that followed a failed airline bombing attempt on Christmas Day. Two travel bloggers have revealed that they have been subpoenaed to provide information that may lead to the source of the leak.

Shortly after an attempted "underwear" bomber was discovered on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on December 25, the Transportation Security Administration issued immediate, temporary changes to security procedures in an attempt to prevent similar incidents. The particular details of those changes were issued in an internal security directive, intended only for TSA employees. However, copies of the directive were leaked to several bloggers and quickly spread around the 'Net.

Writers Chris Elliott and Steven Frischling both received copies of the security directive from anonymous sources, and both published the text of the directive after mass confusion set in among holiday travelers affected by the sudden changes in security procedures. It appears that the TSA is not punishing either for publishing the document; rather, they are trying to find the source of the leak.

"The DHS & TSA are taking this matter seriously, and that tells me that they are paying attention to security in detail," Frischling wrote on his blog. So far, neither has admitted to knowing the identity of the source of the TSA directive.

The leak is somewhat embarrassing for the TSA, though, in light of a recent leak of the entire contents of the TSA's "Standard Operating Procedures" manual online. That disclosure was due to improper redacting of the document, which the TSA later claimed to be out of date.

The TSA, from my observations, continually manages to fix the barn door well after the horses have fled out the window, or a completely different exit. Being a Canadian, it would be likely that I would face the demands placed on travellers coming in via air, if I was not fairly close to Buffalo. I usually fly from there when flying in the US just because of the outrageous fees imposed on flights from Pearson (Toronto, ON), but that's an other story.

Currently, all flights inbound are not allowed carry-on luggage. Forget the fact the "underwear" bomber wasn't actually using his carry-on to smuggle the bomb in. What gets me riled the most is the fact I must now check all my gear, including expensive electronics and photographic equipment. Airlines have made it explicitly clear they are not responsible for lost or stolen items from luggage. If gear goes missing I'm, at the very least, out the time and money to replace the gear when I reach my destination. I can't lock my luggage, because the TSA demands I leave it unlocked for ease of theft ^h^h^h^h inspection. If I lock it, I am almost guaranteed to have the luggage locks broken, my belongings rifled though, and things taken from my kit. (Yes, I've had this occur in the past, at least twice.)

To further illustrate how useless TSA is: Shortly after 9/11 I was required to work in Washington, D.C. for approximately four months. This necessitated frequent travel from Washington to Toronto and back. On one of those trips I was stopped and held by TSA when the agent could not figure out my camera, a Twin Lens Reflex film camera that I use from time to time. The agent was shown, repeatedly, by me how the camera operated. That there was no film in it, and no, it really, really didn't use ANY batteries. No, there wasn't a battery compartment, because it needed NO batteries. It is completely mechanical. Eventually a supervisor came by to see why the line up behind me was not moving. He told me to pack back up and assured the agent that the object she was holding was, indeed, a camera. I got into Washington, started unpacking my gear and realized that my swiss army knife was... in my pocket. Wow, thanks TSA!

I'm waiting for someone to leak a TSA memo that floats the idea of having all travelers remove their underwear before going through security. (There would of course be an express line for commandos only.)

Upon seeing a headline on CNN the other day right after this incident happened that was something like "man on plane has bomb in underwear", I wonder how many other people thought for a moment that they'd arrived at theonion.com instead... (In trying to find the exact wording that CNN had used, I did a search for "underwear bomb" on their site; while not bringing up the exact headline in question, the search results did include "When to reveal your secret to a date" and an ad for "Steamy Hot Ladies' Undies". Ugh.)

Originally posted by apple4ever:The TSA is a joke. Lets get rid of it.

Agreed. Especially as the TSA is far more of an annoyance than protective.

quote:

Originally posted by +Griz:so a blogger who reposted a memo that was sent to thousands of airports worldwide is now receiving more government attention than the bomber did when his father reported him to the CIA

So let's see: the upshot of all this is that foreign airports (at least two involved that I recall) won't be doing spit; the airports here are going to be buying craploads of scanners so they can see under clothes (your tax dollars at work); there will be more airport theatre to make people THINK they are helping and that you will somehow be "safe"; they will make it even easier for airport personnel to steal your valuables; the lines will be longer and slower. erm, I'm still not seeing the advantage here.

I was just called buy TSA's Deputy Chief Counsel for Enforcement telling me that the TSA is dropping any and all investigation of how I received the Security Directive.

The TSA had my laptop, there was no data of interest to them on the laptop, I knew that. I am not discussing where they indicated they'd be looking for that data next. If they went that next step a challenge would have ensued.

Originally posted by apple4ever:The TSA is a joke. Lets get rid of it.

Seems to me they just happen to enforce the worst form of travel security precautions ... except for all others that were tried before it.

Not true. Despite being just as interesting a target, Israel's not had a successful attack against their air transportation system since the 60s. Their screening may be grossly discriminatory at times, but it's fast and effective. Even those pulled out for questioning still make it through way faster than they would here, if they don't pose an apparent threat.

The judge should quash this subpoena immediately. To Yhbv24, I've seen what the Israeli's do, and it is NOTHING more than racial and ethnic profiling, which they wouldn't have to do if they hadn't STOLEN (yes, I said STOLEN) the land that they are on from the Middle Eastern countries.

Originally posted by Alfrik:The TSA, from my observations, continually manages to fix the barn door well after the horses have fled out the window, or a completely different exit. Being a Canadian, it would be likely that I would face the demands placed on travellers coming in via air, if I was not fairly close to Buffalo. I usually fly from there when flying in the US just because of the outrageous fees imposed on flights from Pearson (Toronto, ON), but that's an other story.

Currently, all flights inbound are not allowed carry-on luggage. Forget the fact the "underwear" bomber wasn't actually using his carry-on to smuggle the bomb in. What gets me riled the most is the fact I must now check all my gear, including expensive electronics and photographic equipment. Airlines have made it explicitly clear they are not responsible for lost or stolen items from luggage. If gear goes missing I'm, at the very least, out the time and money to replace the gear when I reach my destination. I can't lock my luggage, because the TSA demands I leave it unlocked for ease of theft ^h^h^h^h inspection. If I lock it, I am almost guaranteed to have the luggage locks broken, my belongings rifled though, and things taken from my kit. (Yes, I've had this occur in the past, at least twice.)

To further illustrate how useless TSA is: Shortly after 9/11 I was required to work in Washington, D.C. for approximately four months. This necessitated frequent travel from Washington to Toronto and back. On one of those trips I was stopped and held by TSA when the agent could not figure out my camera, a Twin Lens Reflex film camera that I use from time to time. The agent was shown, repeatedly, by me how the camera operated. That there was no film in it, and no, it really, really didn't use ANY batteries. No, there wasn't a battery compartment, because it needed NO batteries. It is completely mechanical. Eventually a supervisor came by to see why the line up behind me was not moving. He told me to pack back up and assured the agent that the object she was holding was, indeed, a camera. I got into Washington, started unpacking my gear and realized that my swiss army knife was... in my pocket. Wow, thanks TSA!

You espoused WONDERFULLY why I think that 'no locking the bags' thing has to go the way of the dodo. I too am worried that if I put my EXPENSIVE laptop when I am flying (I only do it about once a year) in my luggage that is checked, that it will do the 'disappearing' act.In fact, I've talked with people who have had that happen to them, their expensive electronics have disappeared on them, and they were out MORE than just the cost to replace the thing in question.... they were also out the money to replace the SOFTWARE on the thing in question.

Also, I am NOT really worried about 9/11.... that thing wouldn't have happened if the damned people ON THE PLANE had gotten MAD and CHARGED the terrorists on the plane.... which, I advise my family and friends to do if someone tries to take over a plane, and (if necessary) throw them out the nearest DOOR WITHOUT A PARACHUTE!It also wouldn't have happened if Monkey Boy Bush had DONE HIS JOB and read his security reports and listened to the FBI people when they were saying "Mr. President! Something bad is being planned here by THESE PEOPLE! We need to find them!" and hadn't ORDERED THEM not to try to find the people in question.Sorry about double-posting here, I didn't realize that I was the last poster as well... stupid me, forgot to look.

Not to get into an off-topic argument, but assuming you're American, I don't see you giving your land back to the Native Americans (or First Nations if you're Canadian).

Have you flown El-Al? They screen EVERYONE very thoroughly, pressurize the baggage before the flight, have locked cockpits before the first passenger gets on and the last passenger gets off, have air marshals on every flight, and more.

And, that land has been stolen from basically everyone, Jews, Romans, Muslims, etc. That's how the world works.

Originally posted by Yhbv24:Not to get into an off-topic argument, but assuming you're American, I don't see you giving your land back to the Native Americans (or First Nations if you're Canadian).

Have you flown El-Al? They screen EVERYONE very thoroughly, pressurize the baggage before the flight, have locked cockpits before the first passenger gets on and the last passenger gets off, have air marshals on every flight, and more.

And, that land has been stolen from basically everyone, Jews, Romans, Muslims, etc. That's how the world works.

No, that isn't 'how the world works', or at least it is not supposed to anymore. You are not allowed to steal land from someone anymore by force of arms (not unless you want to end up in prison), and that was basically what was done to Middle Eastern countries whose land Israel is now on.

Now, if they had actually PAID FOR THE LAND AND allowed the Palestinians to stay in that country instead of being forced out and marginalized... I would say that they could stay.

Unfortunately, right now, they are doing things to the Palestinians that equate almost to what the Nazi's did to the Jewish, which is the SAD thing about the situation going out there.Don't bring up the 'the Palestinians have been doing terrorism'.... BAP! Right across the face, as they say.... what the hell ELSE do you expect people who are not 'well armed' compared to their oppressors to do?If the same thing was true back in the Founding Fathers of America's time.... they would have done 'terrorist acts' as well.... oh wait, they did. They WIPED OUT TO THE LAST MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD (even BABY) quite a few British sympathizers.If that isn't terrorism, I don't know what is.

Originally posted by Yhbv24:Not to get into an off-topic argument, but assuming you're American, I don't see you giving your land back to the Native Americans (or First Nations if you're Canadian).

Have you flown El-Al? They screen EVERYONE very thoroughly, pressurize the baggage before the flight, have locked cockpits before the first passenger gets on and the last passenger gets off, have air marshals on every flight, and more.

And, that land has been stolen from basically everyone, Jews, Romans, Muslims, etc. That's how the world works.

No, that isn't 'how the world works', or at least it is not supposed to anymore. You are not allowed to steal land from someone anymore by force of arms (not unless you want to end up in prison), and that was basically what was done to Middle Eastern countries whose land Israel is now on.

Now, if they had actually PAID FOR THE LAND AND allowed the Palestinians to stay in that country instead of being forced out and marginalized... I would say that they could stay.

Unfortunately, right now, they are doing things to the Palestinians that equate almost to what the Nazi's did to the Jewish, which is the SAD thing about the situation going out there.Don't bring up the 'the Palestinians have been doing terrorism'.... BAP! Right across the face, as they say.... what the hell ELSE do you expect people who are not 'well armed' compared to their oppressors to do?If the same thing was true back in the Founding Fathers of America's time.... they would have done 'terrorist acts' as well.... oh wait, they did. They WIPED OUT TO THE LAST MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD (even BABY) quite a few British sympathizers.If that isn't terrorism, I don't know what is.

i know what is terrorism...

the Jordanians not letting the Palestinians live in Jordan...and the Egyptians not letting the Palestinians live in Egypt...and the Syrians not letting the Palestinians live in Syria...

i mean, all of those countries have a metric shitton of open land (not including the land they all went to get back in '67)...

yet for some reason, the Palestinians (aka, former Jordanians) are stuck in crappy cramped conditions of the West Bank and Gaza - which they now own and run - instead of living in countries which area) ethnically the sameb) religiously the sameas the Palestinians

No - the solution is that the Jews don't get a few mile wide country after the shit they put up with in WWII by the Germans and the rest of Europe and the Middle East, and they need to be driven into the sea.

Israel's land was the best compromise because basically no one lived there permanently (very very few people lived there in permanent dwellings because its shit for land), and when they attempted to let the Arabs keep living there - it was one fuck-the-Jews after another.

The more government wants to protect my freedoms the less of them they seem to want me to have. Abolish TSA, really abolish Homerland Security, what exactly did they do to prevent anything with the wedgie bomber. Take 1/10 of 1/10 of 1 percent of the current budget and buy a side arm for every air captain. They can inspect everyone boarding their plane with the side arm clearly visible.